Re: Benchmarks: Linux Kernel RAID vs a Hardware RAID setup

[Ben Martin <monkeyiq@users.sourceforge.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1480 bytes --]

On Tue, 2008-07-15 at 19:20 -0500, Jon Nelson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 7:01 PM, Richard Scobie <richard@sauce.co.nz> wrote:
> > Keld Jørn Simonsen wrote:
> >
> >> I would actually welcome more tests with specific user profiles, like
> >> many small reads and writes for database  use, and concurrent random
> >> reading and writing to simulate the load on a server. What bonnie++ is
> >> reporting is only equential IO. This is important on work stations, but
> >> actually not on servers.
> >
> > The following is from the Bonnie++ man page:
> >
> > "There  are  two  sections  to the program's operations. The first is to
> > test the IO throughput in a fashion that is designed to  simulate  some
> > types of database applications. The second is to test creation, reading and
> > deleting many small files in a fashion similar to the usage patterns of
> > programs such as Squid or INN."
> >
> > So I guess the author thinks it's valid for more than sequential I/O.
> >
> > In any case, while we may be in a minority, Justin, I and a few others are
> > interested in sequential I/O, as we build servers required to read and write
> > multiple streams of uncompressed SD and HD video in realtime.
> 
> In that case, the 'fstest' program (google for it, it's associated
> with the samba folks IIRC), might be just the ticket.

Since I was digging around, the link for future readers;
http://www.samba.org/ftp/unpacked/junkcode/fstest.c



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]